Skip to main content

Cause Marketing and Galvanic Corrosion


Are there some cause marketing elements that should not be placed together in the same campaign? Or, if your company has a cause campaign with one charity are there other charities you should not support with a cause campaign?

These and other questions came to me recently while watching roofers replace the roof on a neighbor's house. They put copper flashing around the chimney and then very carefully nailed it down with expensive copper nails.

Anyone who has every roofed a house knows why. If you used the same galvanized nails that you use to nail down shingles they would react with the copper. First the nails would corrode and then the copper flashing in the area where the nail had been would corrode. It’s the result of an electrochemical reaction called galvanic corrosion.

You see the same effect in the kitchen when you bake salty foods like lasagna in a steel pan and cover it with aluminum foil. Leave it on too long and the foil will get pitted where it touches the lasagna. That’s galvanic corrosion, too.

You don’t have to know your anodes from cathodes to realize that galvanic corrosion is not far removed from the process whereby batteries create electricity.

But back to the question.

If you’re a company and your cause-related marketing mix included promotions for two different charities, would it create energy or corrosion?

For instance, right now Rite Aid, the large drug chain, is doing a paper icon campaign for Children’s Miracle Network (CMN). [CMN’s coupon icon is above along with CMN’s generic table tent on display on Rite Aid’s counter.] Barely two months ago Rite Aid did a similar campaign for the American Heart Association. Do they risk “icon campaign fatigue” or does the familiarity with the campaign improve results for everyone?

If you’re a charity is it prudent or boneheaded to try to sell cause marketing sponsorships to companies that compete with your current sponsors?

If you’re an agency doing cause-related marketing promotions would you turn down any business from a client’s competitor? OK, dumb question.

My answer is that it certainly could be corrosive for firms to do too many of the same kinds of campaigns in quick succession. Likewise, I would be very cautious about taking cause sponsorships to competitors of my existing sponsors. Certainly I would make sure I got a buy-off from existing sponsors before talking to their competitors.

But I remember Tom Smith... who was a long-time CEO at Food Lion... would call his competitors on behalf of Children’s Miracle Network because supporting CMN “was the right thing for the grocery business to do.”

The result of that kind of generosity of spirit is that CMN has long had a grocer campaign that crossed many boundaries and includes many competitors, even though CMN’s biggest sponsor has long been Wal-Mart, which competes with every retailer in America.

Whaddya think?

Feel free to comment.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Cause Marketing: The All Packaging Edition

One way to activate a cause marketing campaign when the sponsor sells a physical product is on the packaging. I started my career in cause marketing on the charity side and I can tell you that back in the day we were thrilled to get a logo on pack of a consumer packaged good (CPG) or even just a mention. Since then, there’s been a welcome evolution of what sponsors are willing and able to do with their packaging in order to activate their cause sponsorships. That said, even today some sponsors don’t seem to have gotten the memo that when it comes to explaining your cause campaign, more really is more, even on something as small as a can or bottle. The savviest sponsors realize that their only guaranteed means of reaching actual customers with a cause marketing message is by putting it on packaging. And the reach and frequency of the media on packaging for certain high-volume CPG items is almost certainly greater than radio, print or outdoor advertising, and, in many cases, TV. More to

Why Even Absurd Cause-Related Marketing Has its Place

Buy a Bikini, Help Cure Cancer New York City (small-d) fashion designer Shoshonna Lonstein Gruss may have one of the more absurd cause-related marketing campaigns I’ve come across lately. When you buy the bikini or girls one-piece swimsuit at Bergdorf-Goodman in New York shown at the left all sales “proceeds” benefit Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center . Look past the weak ‘ proceeds ’ language, which I always decry, and think for a moment about the incongruities of the sales of swimsuits benefiting the legendary Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Cancer has nothing to do swimming or swimsuits or summering in The Hamptons for that matter. And it’s not clear from her website why Shoshanna, the comely lass who once adorned the arm of comedian Jerry Seinfeld, has chosen the esteemed cancer center to bestow her gifts, although a web search shows that she’s supported its events for years. Lesser critics would say that the ridiculousness of it all is a sign that cause-related marketing is

A Clever Cause Marketing Campaign from Snickers and Feeding America

Back in August I bought this cause-marketed Snickers bar during my fourth trip of the day to Home Depot. (Is it even possible to do home repairs and take care of all your needs with just one trip to Home Depot / Lowes ?) Here’s how it works: Snickers is donating the cost of 2.5 million meals to Feeding America, the nation’s leading hunger-relief charity. On the inside of the wrapper is a code. Text that code to 45495… or enter it at snickers.com… and Snickers will donate the cost of one meal to Feeding America, up to one million additional meals. The Feeding America website says that each dollar you donate provides seven meals. So Snickers donation might be something like $500,000. But I like that Snickers quantified its donations in terms of meals made available, rather than dollars. That’s much more concrete. It doesn’t hurt that 3.5 million is a much bigger number than $500,000. I also like the way they structured the donation. By guaranteeing 2.5 million meals, the risk of a poor